Results Framework

The Global Programme’s Results Framework tracks aggregate results across its 32 priority contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Syria, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Ukraine, Yemen, and Kosovo^[1]. In the tables below, we provide our results achieved per each of our global indicators since 2015. In 2018, we achieved over 82% of our global targets.

^{[1] References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of Security Council resolution 1244 (1999)}

Political Engagement

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators²	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators²	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 1: A political environment that strengthens rule of law and human rights is further enabled.	1.1 Number of contexts with improved capacities for oversight and/or governance mechanisms in the security sector	7³	2015	9⁴	14⁵	7	20	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Iraq, Liberia, Libya, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Ukraine, Yemen, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: IRRF⁶ Indicator 2.2.3.3⁷ RoLSHR Reporting⁸ The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	1.2 Joint programmes in place to increase the impact of UN system delivery in creating political spaces for the development of justice, security and human rights institutions	5⁹	2015	10¹⁰	15¹¹	8	32	2018 Contexts: Central African Republic (3), Colombia (6), Democratic Republic of the Congo (2), Guinea-Bissau (1), Haiti (1), Kyrgyz Republic (1), Lebanon (1), Liberia (1), Libya (1), Mali (1), Myanmar (1), State of Palestine (1), Sierra Leone (1), Somalia (6), Sri Lanka (1), Sudan (1), Yemen (2), Kosovo[1] (1) Means of Verification: IRRF Indicator 3.2.2.1.D¹² RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED

^{2. This framework tracks results across the 32 priority countries (including Lebanon and Jordan as affected by the Syrian crisis) for UNDP’s Global Programme on Strengthening the Rule of Law and Human Rights for Sustaining Peace and Fostering Development (Phase III) to illustrate progress year-on-year.} ^{3. Baseline Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Iraq, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Tunisia} ^{4. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Colombia, Iraq, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tunisia} ^{5. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, Liberia, Libya, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tunisia} ^{6. Information verified through “IRRF Indicators” is data gathered through UNDP’s corporate reporting system, the Integrated Results and Resources Framework, which is aligned with UNDP’s Strategic Plan.} ^{7. IRRF Indicator 2.2.3.3 measures “Number of additional contexts with strengthened capacities for governance and oversight of rule of law institutions²⁰”} ^{8. Information verified through the ‘RoLSHR Reporting’ (written in italics) is data gathered from various Rule of Law, Security, and Human Rights for Sustaining Peace and Development team processes, i.e. annual reporting, mission reports, direct communication with Country Offices, fact sheets, meeting outcomes, briefing notes, etc.} ^{9. Baseline Contexts: Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Mali, Somalia, Sudan} ^{10. 2016 Contexts: Central African Republic (2 projects), Democratic Republic of The Congo, Haiti, Mali (2 projects), Liberia, Somalia, State of Palestine, Sudan} ^{11. 2017 Contexts: Central African Republic (2 projects), Democratic Republic of The Congo, Guinea- Bissau, Haiti, Mali (2 projects), Myanmar, Lebanon, Libya, Liberia, Somalia, State of Palestine, Sudan} ^{12. IRRF Indicator 3.2.2.1.D measures “Number of contexts with national and local systems restored or adopted following crises: utilizing joint UN approaches to rebuilding rule of law and justice sector institutions and services”}

Institution Building

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 2: Capable justice and security institutions are established and strengthened to increase and improve service delivery in crisis-affected and transitional settings.	2.1 Number of contexts where justice and security services reach out to an increasing and/or more inclusive number of people	24¹³	2015	26¹⁴	28¹⁵	25	29	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Guatemala, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea (Conakry), Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	2.2 Number of contexts with national-level security strategies that are developed through a participatory process, comply with human rights standards, and/or support reducing armed violence and promote control of small arms	6	2016¹⁶	6¹⁷	7¹⁸	6	8	2018 Contexts: Central African Republic, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Somalia, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED

^{13. Baseline Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Kosovo[1]} ^{14. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Kosovo[1]} ^{15. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Lebanon, Liberia, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Kosovo[1]} ^{16. Baselines for Global Programme indicators not previously reported on were determined following the first year of Phase 3 implementation and reporting (2016). Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2016 are the same for this indicator.} ^{17. 2016Contexts: Colombia, Guatemala, Iraq, Jordan, Liberia, Somalia} ^{18. 2017 Contexts: Central African Republic, Guatemala, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Somalia, Kosovo[1]}

Community Security

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 3: Comprehensive community security approaches are developed, strengthened, and/or applied.	3.1 Number of contexts where gender-sensitive, evidence-based security strategies for reducing armed violence and/or controlling small arms are in operation at the community level	6¹⁹	2015	7²⁰	8²¹	7	16	2018 Contexts: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: IRRF Indicator 3.2.2.1.C²² RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	3.2 Number of contexts with community-oriented policing programmes developed and/or operational	7²³	2015	11²⁴	12²⁵	11	19	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Ukraine, Yemen, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED

^{19. Baseline Contexts: Afghanistan, Guinea (Conakry),Nepal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Kosovo[1]} ^{20. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Guinea (Conakry), Nepal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Kosovo[1]} ^{21. 2017 Contexts Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Nepal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Kosovo[1]} ^{22. IRRF Indicator 3.2.2.1.C measures “Number of contexts with national and local systems restored or adopted following crises: community-oriented security services and oversight mechanisms”} ^{23. Baseline Contexts: Afghanistan,Jordan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Tunisia, Kosovo[1]} ^{24. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Jordan, Liberia, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]} ^{25. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Libya, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]}

Human Rights Systems

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 4: National human rights systems are strengthened and made more effective in promoting and protecting human rights.	4.1 Number of contexts with strengthened operational institutions supporting the fulfillment of nationally and internationally ratified human rights obligations	10²⁶	2015	12²⁷	18²⁸	9	24	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: IRRF Indicator 2.2.3.1²⁹ RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	4.2 Number of contexts receiving assistance to improve or maintain NHRI rating from the GHANRI Sub-Committee on Accreditation³⁰	8	2017³¹	-	8³²	15	9	2018 Contexts: Central African Republic, Haiti, Iraq, Liberia, Mali, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Ukraine Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: PARTIALLY ACHIEVED

^{26. Baseline Contexts: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, , Kyrgyz Republic, Sierra Leone, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, Yemen, Kosovo[1]} ^{27. 2016 Contexts: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, , Kyrgyz Republic, Mali, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]} ^{28. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Mali, Nepal, Sri-Lanka, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]} ^{29. IRRF Indicator 2.2.3.1 measures “Number of additional contexts with strengthened institutions and systems supporting fulfilment of nationally and internationally ratified human rights obligations: rule of law and justice, and human rights”} ^{30. Indicator 4.2 was changed from “number of contexts with NHRIs receiving an “A status” rating from the GANHRI Sub-Committee on Accreditation” in 2017 to better reflect the contributions of the global programme. Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2017 are the same for this indicator.} ^{31. Baselines and targets for Global Programme indicators not previously reported on were determined following the first year of Phase 3 implementation and reporting (2016). Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2016 are the same for this indicator.} ^{32. 2017 Contexts: Haiti, Liberia, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Somalia, Ukraine}

Access to Justice

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 5: Access to justice for all is increased – particularly for vulnerable and marginalized groups, including minorities – and discrimination, exclusion and other drivers³³	5.1 Number of additional people who have access to justice	129,933	2015	209,444	431,086	28,655,315	27,999,956	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina³⁴ , Burundi, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: IRRF Indicator 2.2.3.2.A³⁵ RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: PARTIALLY ACHIEVED
	5.3 Number of contexts with active access to justice and/or legal aid programmes in place at the community level	12³⁶	2015	18³⁷	23³⁸	18	25	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED

^{33. GPRF Indicator 5.2 “Cases receiving judgment in the first instance of the formal justice system” is not measured in UNDP Strategic Plan (2018-2021).} ^{34. Bosnia and Herzegovina results were added from IRRF indicator 2.2.3.2.D (number of marginalized people accessing justice) since there was no figure in component A (for total number of people).} ^{35. IRRF indicator 2.2.3.2.A measures “Total number of additional population who have access to justice.”The previous IRRF indicator 3.4.1 (UNDP Strategic Plan 2013-2017) linked to GPRF indicator 5.1 measured “Total number of people who have access to legal aid services.”} ^{36. Baseline Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia, Iraq, Jordan, Nepal, Pakistan, Somalia, State of Palestine, Sudan, Tunisia, Kosovo[1]} ^{37. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Nepal, Pakistan, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Kosovo[1]} ^{38. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]}

Transitional Justice

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs

Output Indicators

Baseline

Results

Value

Year

2016

Actual

2017

Actual

2018

Target

2018

Actual

Key Evidence

Output 6: Transitional justice processes and/or mechanisms are promoted in conflict-affected contexts.³⁹

6.2 Number of contexts with transitional justice processes and/or mechanisms in place

10⁴⁰

2015

12⁴¹

11⁴²

2018 Contexts:

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Haiti, Libya, Mali, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tunisia

Means of Verification:

IRRF Indicator 3.2.2.1.B⁴³

RoLSHR Reporting

The annual target is:

ACHIEVED

^{39. GPRF Indicator 6.1 6.1 “Total number of victims whose grievances cases are addressed within transitional justice processes” is not measured in UNDP Strategic Plan (2018-2021).} ^{40. Baseline Contexts: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Guatemala, Libya, South Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen, Kosovo[1]} ^{41. 2016 Contexts: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Liberia, Libya, South Sudan, Sudan, Tunisia, Kosovo[1]} ^{42. 2017 Contexts: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Libya, South Sudan, Sudan, Sri Lanka, Tunisia} ^{43. IRRF Indicator 3.2.2.1.B measures “Number of contexts with national and local systems restored or adopted following crises: victim redress mechanisms including transitional justice”}

Gender Justice

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 7: Human rights, access to justice, and security for women and girls are increased.⁴⁴	7.1 Number of contexts with programmes in place to increase women’s representation in the justice and security sectors	5⁴⁵	2016	5⁴⁶	7⁴⁷	9	11	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Guinea-Bissau, Lebanon, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Timor-Leste, Tunisia Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	7.2 Number of contexts that have a strengthened legal and/or policy framework in place to prevent and address sexual and gender-based violence	3⁴⁸	2015	7⁴⁹	9⁵⁰	9	15	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Nepal, Somalia, Sudan, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, State of Palestine, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: IRRF Indicator 1.6.2.2.A⁵¹ RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	7.3 Number of contexts with justice and security services and other mechanisms/processes in place to prevent, respond to, and address sexual and gender-based violence	11⁵²	2015	20⁵³	19⁵⁴	15	23	2018 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Mali, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Syria, Timor-Leste, Ukraine Means of Verification: IRRF Indicator 1.6.2.2.B⁵⁵ RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: ACHIEVED

^{44. GPRF indicator 7.4 “Existence of new and strengthened legal aid and justice services to prevent and address sexual and gender-based violence” is not measured in UNDP Strategic Plan (2018-2021).} ^{45. Baselines and targets for Global Programme indicators not previously reported on were determined following the first year of Phase 3 implementation and reporting (2016). Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2016 are the same for this indicator.} ^{46. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Nepal, Pakistan, Timor-Leste} ^{47. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Nepal, Pakistan, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Timor-Leste} ^{48. Baseline Contexts: Sierra Leone, Sudan, Kosovo[1]} ^{49. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Mali, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Kosovo[1]} ^{50. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Mali, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, South Sudan, Sudan, Kosovo[1]} ^{51. IRRF Indicator 1.6.2.2.A measures “Number of additional contexts with frameworks in place to prevent and respond to SGBV: Multi-sectoral policy and legislation”} ^{52. Baseline Contexts: Afghanistan, Burundi, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of The Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan} ^{53. 2016 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, Kyrgyz Republic, Liberia, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Sudan, Timor-Leste, Ukraine} ^{54. 2017 Contexts: Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi,Central African Republic,Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea (Conakry), Iraq, Liberia, Mali, Nepal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Timor-Leste, Ukraine} ^{55. IRRF Indicator 1.6.2.2.B measures “Number of additional contexts with frameworks in place to prevent and respond to SGBV: multi-sectoral services including justice and security”}

Programme

! INSTRUCTIONS: Scroll < > to view additional table columns

Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Baseline		Results
Expected Programme Outputs	Output Indicators	Value	Year	2016 Actual	2017 Actual	2018 Target	2018 Actual	Key Evidence
Output 8: High quality programming is assured through improved quality assurances processes, mainstreamed human rights in programming, and strengthening of external partnerships.	8.1 Number of projects/programmes undertaking a uniform M&E approach	2⁵⁶	2016	2⁵⁷	4⁵⁸	10	5	2018 Contexts: Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Jordan, Guinea-Bissau Means of Verification: RoLSHR Reporting The annual target is: PARTIALLY ACHIEVED
	8.2 Number of projects/programmes utilizing HRBA and SES	19⁵⁹	2016	19⁶⁰	22⁶¹	20	28⁶²	2018 Contexts: Burundi, Bosnia and Herzegovina (2 projects), Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Haiti, Jordan, Kyrgyz Republic, Mali (2 projects), Myanmar, Lebanon, Liberia (2 projects), Somalia (3 projects), South Sudan, State of Palestine (2 projects), Sudan, Syria, Ukraine (2 projects), Yemen, Kosovo[1] Means of Verification: UNDP Quality Assurance Assessments⁶³ The annual target is: ACHIEVED
	8.3 Number of ongoing and/or new external partnership agreements and opportunities supporting the delivery of UN rule of law and human rights assistance	7⁶⁴	2016	7⁶⁵	14⁶⁶	3	15	2018 Partnerships: The Folke Bernadotte Academy; The Global Alliance for Reporting on Peaceful, Just, and Inclusive Societies ; Clingendael; The Global Focal Point for Police Justice, and Corrections; The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law; The International Center for Transitional Justice; International Security Sector Advisory Team; Namati Grassroots Justice Prize; New York University’s Center for International Cooperation’s Pathfinders/ International Task Force on Justice; Overseas Development Institute; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Open Society Justice Initiative Measuring Justice

^{56. Baselines and targets for Global Programme indicators not previously reported on were determined following the first year of Phase 3 implementation and reporting (2016). Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2016 are the same for this indicator.} ^{57. 2016 Contexts: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea-Bissau} ^{58. 2017 Contexts: Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Jordan, Guinea-Bissau} ^{59. Baselines and targets for Global Programme indicators not previously reported on were determined following the first year of Phase 3 implementation and reporting (2016). Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2016 are the same for this indicator.} ^{60. 2016Contexts: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, (2 projects), Kyrgyz Republic, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal (2 projects), Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]} ^{61. 2017 Contexts: SES: Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan(2 projects), Kyrgyz Republic, Mali, Myanmar, Nepal (2 projects), Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Tunisia, Ukraine, Kosovo[1]} ^{62. UNDP only requires Quality Assurance assessments during the implementation phase of a project every other year. 2018 is an off year for the assessments; thus, the number of projects reported are lower.} ^{63. Information verified through the “UNDP Quality Assurance Assessments” is data gathered from corporate mechanisms to assure adherence to quality standards. Projects included in this indicator are ranked “satisfactory” or above when it comes to utilizing the SES standards, which includes HRBA as an overarching principle.} ^{64. Baselines and targets for Global Programme indicators not previously reported on were determined following the first year of Phase 3 implementation and reporting (2016). Thus, baselines and actuals for the year of 2016 are the same for this indicator.} ^{65. 2016 Partnerships: The Global Focal Point for Police Justice, and Corrections; UNDP and UNHCR Global Partnership on Rule of Law and Governance; UNDP - OHCHR - GANHRI Partnership to Support National Human Rights Institutions, The Global Alliance for Reporting on Peaceful, Just, and Inclusive Societies; Clingendael, the Folke Bernadotte Academy, International Security Sector Advisory Team.} ^{66. 2017 Active Partnerships: The Folke Bernadotte Academy; The Global Alliance for Reporting on Peaceful, Just, and Inclusive Societies ; Clingendael; The Global Focal Point for Police Justice, and Corrections; The Hague Institute for Innovation of Law; The International Center for Transitional Justice; International Security Sector Advisory Team; Namati Grassroots Justice Prize; New York University’s Center for International Cooperation’s Pathfinders/ International Task Force on Justice; Overseas Development Institute; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Open Society Justice Initiative Measuring Justice Initiative; Private Sector Partnership for the Rule of Law; UNDP - OHCHR - GANHRI Partnership to Support National Human Rights Institutions; UNDP and UNHCR Global Partnership on Rule of Law and Governance}